The Shifting Tides of Battle: Elemental Storm et al.

Fighting the Ennead right now, and a hypothetical occurred to me while I was resolving Elemental Storm (which might apply to other Ennead cards or even to cards in some other decks, not sure).  Elemental Storm reads "The villain target with the lowest HP deals each hero target 1 lightning, 1 fire, and 1 cold".  Say the lowest-HP Ennead member is Atum, and he's got 2 HP left (or 1 HP and Nuit is in play).  Absolute Zero has his Isothermic Transducer and Focused Apertures in play, so when Atum hits him for 1 Fire damage, he retaliates with 2 cold damage, killing Atum.  Does this abort the resolution of Elemental Storm, since the Ennie who was unleashing the Storm went down?  Or does the Storm continue resolving with the next lowest-HP Ennie now being the source of the damage?

Yes, it aborts the Storm.

The storm would end, that is correct.

Why? There is still a lowest on the board.

If the lowest HP Hero can change within a single card's damage dealing (e.g. smoke bomb redirecting multiple heroes damage) why can it not happen with villains too?

(I don't know either way, so I am genuinely looking for an answer here)

This is a fair point. 

Smoke Bombs might be a different case because the source of the damage has not gone away. The question here I think is whether a Damage Effect can have multiple sources.

Usually, once the "source" of a damage effect has been destroyed, the damage effect is interupted. If a single damage effect (Storm being a single damage effect with multiple instances of damage) can have multiple sources. 

I agree with this. Further, usually once the "source" of a damage effect has been determined, it does not change. I can not think of any effect in the game that changes the source of damage dealt.

So I think that no more damage would be dealt, but I agree that this is not absolutely clear.

Usually it stops because the source of the damage is the card telling you to deal the damage as well e.g. Char, or is the villain Character Card, which when it is destroyed you win.

I am hard pressed to think of cards outside of the Ennead that deal multiple targets some damage not from the villain Character Card that does not come from instructions on a target itself.

Yeah i think this issue is unique to the Ennead.

But we have no precedent for a single damage effect changing sources mid-effect which is what makes this interesting. 

Because of that, right now I am leaning toward that once a source of damage has been identified for a particular effect, that source would not change. This is the safe way to interpret this in my opinion as it keeps the strategic decision to kill off the source to interupt the damage sequence which a staple in the games strategy in general.

Usually the source of damage is listed by name on the card. Or it states "This card".

I can not think of any effect in the game that changes the source of damage dealt. 

The question still stands though. Can the source of damage change mid-effect?

How the card identifies the source is sorta insignificant as it pertains to the above question.

For instance, Flanking Maneuvers uses the same "lowest HP villain" (or clone in this case) as the source of its damage. However it is only a single instance of damage, and cant be interupted the same way AoE damage effects can. They don't really help answer the question.

Captain's Orders

Is the source really changing? Isn't it the lowest Ennead member who will be doing the damage. If the current lowest Ennead member gets incapped mid damage, is there still a lowest Ennead member still in play? So that means the source is still from the lowest Ennead member.

How the card identifies the source is sorta insignificant as it pertains to the above question.

For instance, Flanking Maneuvers uses the same "lowest HP villain" (or clone in this case) as the source of its damage. However it is only a single instance of damage, and cant be interupted the same way AoE damage effects can. They don't really help answer the question.

I would think the answer would be no.  The effect is not being modified, like X based attacks, or an all target damage that hits Chrono letting him toxin dart something.

To change sources the effect is altering quite a bit.  We don't have terminology or prior effects that show this step happenning, so I doubt it is the designers intent that it can change sources.

The effect says the lowest HP villain target deals each hero target damage. If the source changed, say from Atum to Set after hitting the first hero, would Set have to reapply the damage to the first hero? After all, the instructions are still for that singular villain target to hit all heros, and Set would not have done that. 

I don't think either of us would like that interpretation for obvious reasons (maybe I'm wrong there?), but strict reading of the effect instructions like this could lead us down that path if the source of damage effects can change mid-effect. 

I don't see why you would get redamaged, the instruction for the lowest HP villain to deal damage has already been dealt with for Ra-with-flamebarrier-creating-this-horrible-situation, it's just not the current lowest after it has done so.

It's the instructions on the one shot, not the instructions on the target that you're following.

But I have no idea which way this one falls. Or even how to guess at the intent of it.

While damage amount is calculated seperately for each instance, the source is not.  I don't think we will se that kind of effect in this game.

But honestly this is something we need a ruling on.

Yeah its a real weird one. I really dislike the notion of changing sources mid-effect, but "designer intent" could go either way here

I can think of more clear wordings for this card for either of the intended effects.

Version A - Killing the Ennie stops the Storm.

Elemental Storm

Choose the villain target with the lowest HP.  That target deals each hero target 1 lightning damage, 1 fire damage, and 1 cold damage.

Version B - The Storm cannot be stopped!

Elemental Storm

The villain target with the lowest HP deals each hero target 1 lightning damage.  The villain target with the lowest HP deals each hero target 1 fire damage.  The villain target with the lowest HP deals each hero target 1 cold damage.

I can't think of a way to make Version B hit the other heroes with Fire even if AZ kills the Fire-caster after being hit.  But at least with this version, the Cold happens after the Fire-caster is killed.  Version A is the way I assume it actually works, but I could see the argument for otherwise.

Where has this been stated? If a link can be provided that the source will not be recalculated, then why hasn't it been done so already? If there is no such link, then why I you saying it like it's a fact?

To be fair, nothing says it does either. There is no other precedent to cite in favor or against. Thats why its being debated in the first place.

To be fair, no one has said "damage amount and the source is calculated seperately for each instance", where "damage is recalculated seperately for each instance, the source is not" has been stated several times in various different ways. Sounds like people who are against the lowest HP Ennead member from changing are using a phrase that has never been confirmed, where the ones who question it are going by the strict wording of the card.

A strict reading of the card wording could also suggest it is intented to be a singular villain target dealing the damage, which would exclude the possibility of multiple targets eventually becoming the source after the effect has already started resolving. I'd say I'm reading the wording just as "strictly" as you but still coming to a different conclusion. 

Its gonna need official input. I would not be surprised if Christopher ruled either way. Both sides are equally valid imo atm, regardless of what I think it should be.

I can't help but think that if they were going for that, they would of worded it more like this;

Select the Villain target with the lowest HP.

That target deals all hero targets X damage.

I agree with you here.

But it is really not that much different than

The Villain target with the lowest HP deals all hero targets X damage

Doesn't the player still have to identify a single villain target to be the one with the lowest HP? The player is already going through the steps of the way you worded it by 1) selecting the target then 2) having them deal all heros the damage. 

Here are the possible senarios, some which we have not entertained, but I thought it worth bringing them up in one place.

Atum is the lowest HP villain with 1 HP. He starts to deal the 3 instances of damage to all heros after playing Elemental Storm. First he hits Ra with Flame Barrier with the first instance, which reacts and kills Atum. Set has 2 HP and is now the lowest. What happens next?

A) Atum was the damage source and is destroyed, so the entire damage sequence is interupted totally

B) Set is the next lowest HP villain and will continue to damage Ra with the 2nd and 3rd instance of damage before moving on to the other heros

C) Set is the next lowest HP villain. Ra is spared the 2nd and 3rd instance of damage from destroying Atum (since destroying the source should interupt damage sequences), but Set will continue to deal damage to the other heros in Atums absence.

They are quite different, one gives a definite result, while the other leads to this long discussion.

Doesn't the player still have to identify a single villain target to be the one with the lowest HP? The player is already going through the steps of the way you worded it by 1) selecting the target then 2) having them deal all heros the damage.  

Not nessesarily. Its important for the player to know which member is the lowest incase one was Stun Bolted or Offensive Transmuted. So yes they have to identify the target regardless of the official ruling. I am just saying players are already going through those steps inadvertantly 

If the ruling is that the source can be changed if the orignal target has been destroyed, then you will not be selecting a target to deal all the damage, you will be selecting a target for each instance of damage. However if you were told to select a target, then that target deals damage, then if that target is destroyed, then the damage would stop. So yes, it is very reliant on the ruling.

What do you think of the validity of option C? It's sort of a middle ground in some senses, but it is the more complex to work out. 

I don't think the damage will continue.

If a villain card dealt the lowest HP target 3 melee and 3 infernal damage and the lowest HP target dies from the melee damage, does the next in line take the infernal damage?

Wouldn't that be the same as if Apostate targetted the Highest HP hero target for 3 melee and 3 infernal, but after the melee damage was dealt that target was no longer the higest HP target?

The attack doesn't reconfigure mid-attack.

But we'll need an official ruling on this one.

Actually I suspect you've got the right of it there phanta.  If the target isn't recalibrated, it makes sense that the source wouldn't be either.

At least thats how I have been playing it.

So if the highest HP hero target does not change mid effect in that case, it could hold true for the lowest HP villain target for Elemental Storms. 

Does anyone play it where Apostate would target a 2nd hero for the infernal damage?